R v Natalie Bryant

When fixing sentence for a serious assault, the court must give a material and individualised reduction for relevant mitigation, including previous good character, remorse and significant personal circumstances. A modest reduction may be insufficient where a co-offender, whose culpability is higher or whose mitigation is materially weaker, receives a similar pre-credit sentence.

An immediate custodial sentence may nevertheless remain necessary where the gravity of a prolonged and serious assault makes suspension unjustified.

The appellant pleaded guilty in the Crown Court at Chester to possession of cannabis and to assault occasioning actual bodily harm, contrary to section 47 of the Offences against the Person Act 1861. She and her co-defendant subjected the complainant to a sustained assault causing substantial physical and psychological harm.

The recorder imposed two years’ immediate imprisonment for the assault after allowing 25 per cent credit for the guilty plea. The appellant appealed against sentence, contending that insufficient weight had been given to her good character, remorse, traumatic personal history and other mitigation, and that the sentence should have been suspended.

1. Appeal allowed as to length of sentence. The court held that the recorder’s sentence was manifestly excessive. The assault was prolonged, serious and aggravated. A pre-credit sentence of three years could properly have been imposed on an offender with little or no mitigation.

2. The appellant’s position required a material reduction from that level. She had no previous convictions or cautions, had shown remorse, had pleaded guilty, and had substantial personal mitigation recorded in the pre-sentence report. The recorder’s effective four-month differentiation from the co-defendant’s pre-credit sentence did not adequately reflect those matters. The co-defendant had relevant previous convictions and no comparable material mitigation.

3. The appropriate sentence, before credit for plea and after weighing aggravation and mitigation, was 24 months’ imprisonment. Applying 25 per cent credit reduced it to 18 months’ imprisonment.

4. Immediate custody remained appropriate. The court declined to interfere with the recorder’s decision not to suspend the sentence. Given the gravity of the attack, the recorder was entitled to conclude that only immediate custody was justified.

The sentence of 24 months’ immediate imprisonment was therefore substituted with 18 months’ immediate imprisonment.

• Court of Appeal (Criminal Division): Allowed the appeal against sentence and substituted 18 months’ immediate imprisonment for the 24-month sentence: [2023] EWCA Crim 1126.
• Crown Court at Chester: On 12 July 2023, imposed two years’ immediate imprisonment for assault occasioning actual bodily harm. No separate penalty was imposed for possession of cannabis.